DILIP H MEHTA Vs. SAILESHCHANDRA PRABHUDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner, who is the original accused, has come to this Court against the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate restoring the complaint filed by respondent No. 1 against the petitioner alleging certain offences.

(2.) It appears that the case was fixed for hearing on June 17, 1977 and on the previous date the parties were given to understand by the Magistrate that the case would be taken up at 1 p.m on that day. However, the case was called out earlier and as the complainant and his Advocate were found to be absent, the learned Magistrate proceeded to discharge the accused.

(3.) On the same day, within about an hour thereafter, the complainant had appeared with his Advocate and made an application to the Magistrate to restore the complaint. As the learned Magistrate was not prima facie sure that he had power to restore the criminal complaint, he called upon the Advocate for the complainant to show an authority. Accordingly, the complainant's Advocate pointed out the decision of the Division Bench of this court In re-Wasudeo Narayan Phadnis & others 51 Cri L. J , 213, and the teamed Magistrate on July 8. 1977 passed the order restoring the complaint.